Hedychrum spina
| Notice: | This page is derived from the original publication listed below, whose author(s) should always be credited. Further contributors may edit and improve the content of this page and, consequently, need to be credited as well (see page history). Any assessment of factual correctness requires a careful review of the original article as well as of subsequent contributions.
If you are uncertain whether your planned contribution is correct or not, we suggest that you use the associated discussion page instead of editing the page directly. This page should be cited as follows (rationale):
Citation formats to copy and paste
BibTeX: @article{Rosa2015ZooKeys, RIS/ Endnote: TY - JOUR Wikipedia/ Citizendium: <ref name="Rosa2015ZooKeys">{{Citation See also the citation download page at the journal. |
Ordo: Hymenoptera
Familia: Chrysididae
Genus: Hedychrum
Name
Hedychrum spina Lepeletier, 1806 – Wikispecies link – Pensoft Profile
- Hedychrum spina: Lepeletier 1806[1]: 121.
Label
[♀]: Elampus spina Lep. - Panzeri var.; Coll. Latr. France / 6262.
Catalogue Casolari & Casolari Moreno. Elampus panzeri, 148, 97, 51, 5 (box 50).
Remarks
The type of Elampus spina (Lepeletier) could be housed at MNHN or in the Spinola collection. A specimen of this species at MNHN is labelled: E. Panzeri F. <handwritten by Lepeletier> / Hedychrum spina Lep. type? <handwritten by du Buysson> / Museum Paris Meudon (S. et. O.) Coll. Le Peletier 160-45 <partially printed, locality handwritten by du Buysson>. This specimen was not considered as a type by du Buysson (1898[2]: 563; 1899[3]: 160), because when arrived at MNHN it was labelled only as Elampus panzeri by Lepeletier, without locality or identification label. It perfectly matches the original description by Lepeletier and the colour drawing furnished by the author. We would nowadays identify this specimen as Elampus constrictus (Förster, 1853) (sensu Móczár 1964a[4]). The specimen in the Spinola collection could alternatively represent the type, but even in this case, there is no certainty. It perfectly matches Lepeletier’s description and it belongs to the species Elampus constrictus (Förster, 1853) also.
Lepeletier’s description is clear: "Tête et corcelet d’un vert bleuâtre; yeux et antennes noirs. Corcelet très-prolongé sous l’écusson. Abdomen doré, troisième segment échancré. Pieds d’un vert bleuâtre; tarses pâle. Ailes à peine enfumée. Mâle. De Meudon". The description is completed by a colour drawing (pl. 6: 2) which shows a specimen with light green head and mesosoma, golden metasoma and small dimensions, being smaller than Hedychrum nitidum [= Holopyga fervida] and Hedychrum lucidum [= Holopyga lucida], and approximately as long as Hedychridium roseum [= Hedychridium roseum]. Description, colouration, and dimensions are different from the species considered Elampus spina sensu Linsenmaier (1959)[5] and Móczár (1964b)[6]. This species is one of the largest Elampus species (up to 9 mm) in Europe, with head and mesosoma dark blue to violet and with a flame red metasoma, sometimens dark red to red-violet on the lateral sides. Even the type locality of Elampus spina seems to be out from the current distributional limits of Elampus spina sensu auctorum.
The misinterpretation of the species that the name Elampus spina refers to started with Dahlbom (1845[7]: 41): Spinola sent a specimen to Dahlbom identified as Elampus spina (or Elampus panzeri var. spina), which he had received from Latreille, and that clearly differs from the specimen now placed in the Spinola collection under the name spina Lep. coll. Latreille.
Dahlbom (1854[8]: 42) did not describe Elampus spina Lepeletier, but instead he described a new species received by Spinola and named Elampus spina Spinola: "Habitat in Gallia, a D. Latreille detectus, e cujus Collectione Illustr. Spinola accepit individuum quod describendi caussa mihi benevole misit". Dahlbom's description matches the description of Elampus bidens (Förster, 1853): "Submagnus 2 1/4 lin. decimal. long. violascenti et purpurascenti-aeneus abdomine cyaneo-viridi, segmento 3:tio ante emarginatnram utrinque bisinuato postscutello mucronato".
Abeille (1878[9]: 1, 2) replaced the name Elampus spina Dahlbom with superbus ("nomen à changer"). Both Elampus spina Dahlbom and Elampus superbus Abeille are synonyms of Elampus bidens.
Based on the type material examined in MNHN, HNHM, and LZM, the original description and drawing, Elampus spina (Lepeletier) (sensu Linsenmaier 1959[5] and Móczár 1964a[4]) is Elampus frivaldszkyi (Förster, 1853) (= Elampus productus Dahlbom, 1854); Elampus constrictus (Förster, 1853) is the junior synonym of Elampus spina (Lepeletier, 1806). We suggest the neotype designation of Elampus spina and a revision of the European species, based on recent findings.
Moreover, we note that Elampus panzeri (Fabricius, 1804) is the valid name for Elampus scutellaris (Panzer, 1798). A future revision of the European species belonging to the genus Elampus is already planned to put in order the complex taxonomical problems of this genus.
Since 1845 the name spina has been considered as a noun and not as an adjective; in fact it was used as an invariable name in the genus Elampus, Ellampus, Omalus, and Notozus in more than fifty publications. Kimsey and Bohart (1991)[10] introduced the name Elampus spinus in accordance with the genus gender, but in conflict with the historical interpretation of the name and the articles 23.5 (applications to spellings) and 33.3.1 of the ICZN (when an incorrect subsequent spelling is in prevailing usage and is attributed to the publication of the original spelling, the subsequent spelling and attribution are to be preserved and the spelling is deemed to be the correct original spelling).
Only three authors followed the interpretation given to the name by Kimsey and Bohart (Elampus spinus (Tyrner 2007[11]), Omalus (Elampus) spinus (Arens 2014, Linsenmaier 1999[12])) while in other publications the name Elampus spina remained in use (Liubomirov 2007, Mingo 1994[13], Rosa 2005a, 2005b, 2006[14], 2009[15], Strumia 1995[16], 2005, Strumia and Yildirim 2007, 2012, Strumia, Gayubo, Gonzalez 2010, Tussac and Zumeta 2004, Vinokurov 2008).
Current status
Elampus spina (Lepeletier, 1806) (transferred by Kimsey and Bohart 1991[10]: 171).
Taxon Treatment
- Rosa, P; Xu, Z; 2015: Annotated type catalogue of the Chrysididae (Insecta, Hymenoptera) deposited in the collection of Maximilian Spinola (1780–1857), Turin ZooKeys, (471): 1-96. doi
Other References
- ↑ Lepeletier A (1806) Mémoire sur quelques espèces nouvelles d’insectes de la section des Hyménoptères appelés les Portetuyaux, et sur les caractères de cette famille et des genres qui la composent. Annales du Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle 7: 115–129.
- ↑ Buysson R (1898) Étude des Chrysidides du Muséum de Paris. Annales de la Société Entomologique de France 66(4): 518–580.
- ↑ Buysson R (1899) Catalogue des Insectes Hyménoptères de la famille des Chrysidides du Muséum de Paris. Bulletin du Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle 5(4): 159–169.
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 Móczár L (1964a) Über die Notozus-Arten Ungarns (Hymenoptera, Chrysididae). Annales Historico-Naturales Musei Nationalis Hungarici 56: 439–447.
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 Linsenmaier W (1959) Revision der Familie Chrysididae (Hymenoptera) mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der europäischen Spezies. Mitteilungen der Schweizerischen Entomologischen Gesellschaft 32: 1–232.
- ↑ Móczár L (1964b) Ergebnisse der Revision der Goldwespenfauna des Karpatenbeckens (Hymenoptera: Chrysididae). Acta Zoologica 10: 433–450.
- ↑ Dahlbom A (1845) Dispositio Methodica Specierum Hymenopterorum secundum Familias Insectorum Naturales – Part II – Chrysis in sensu Linnaeano. Berlingianis, Lund, 20 pp.
- ↑ Dahlbom A (1854) Hymenoptera Europaea praecipue Borealia, formis typicis nonnullis, specierum generumve exoticorum propter nexum systematicum associatis, per familias, genera, species et varietates disposita atque descripta ab Adrea Gustavo Dahlbom. Chrysis in sensu Linneano. Vol. II, F. Nicolai, Berlin, 412 pp.
- ↑ Abeille de Perrin E (1878) Diagnoses de Chrysides nouvelles. Published by the author, Marseille, 6 pp.
- ↑ 10.0 10.1 Kimsey L, Bohart R (1991) The Chrysidid Wasps of the World. University Press, New York, 652 pp.
- ↑ Tyrner P (2007) Chrysidoidea: Chrysididae (zlatěnkovití). Acta Entomologica Musei Nationalis Pragae, supplement 11: 41–63.
- ↑ Linsenmaier W (1999) Die Goldwespen Nordafrikas (Hymenoptera, Chrysididae). Entomofauna Suppl. 10: 1–281.
- ↑ Mingo E (1994) Hymenoptera Chrysididae. Fauna Iberica. Museo Nacional de Cencias Naturales Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, Madrid, vol. 6, 256 pp.
- ↑ Rosa P (2006) I Crisidi della Valle d’Aosta. Monografie del Museo regionale di Scienze naturali, St. -Pierre, Aosta, 368 pp.
- ↑ Rosa P (2009) Catalogo dei Tipi dei Crisidi del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale "G. Doria" di Genova (Hymenoptera, Chrysididae). Annali del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale "G. Doria" 100: 209–272.
- ↑ Strumia F (1995) Hymenoptera Chrysididae. In: Minelli A Ruffo S La Posta S (Eds) Checklist delle specie della fauna italiana. Calderini (Bologna) 99: 1–10.
